3 ms·

There is no rule of law of customs of the internet, however. That's been the big push for the last decade within the US: to develop an international norms frame

There is no rule of law of customs of the internet, however. That's been the big push for the last decade within the US: to develop an international norms framework for the internet. The problem is that many of the activities being performed by China, Russia, France, Germany, the UK, Israel, Canada, the US, etc are being performed by others - it's difficult for us to condemn China without equally condemning the others. (Those wanting to argue a straw man will suggest that the technical details of this attack are somehow above and beyond the pale of what other nations are known to do and make their argument about js injection.) It's true that China is much more crass and less developed in their cyber capability. It isn't that much less effective however.

rwallace 12y ago
And that is one of the reasons it would be a good idea for the US and other Western countries to dial down some of their more aggressive actions: those actions set precedence that encourage other countries like China to match the escalation.
- cpncrunch 12y ago
  There does seem to be a difference, though. The US monitors communications, adds backdoors to infrastructure to monitor communications, and injects malware into Iranian nuclear reactors that could be used to make weapons. China, on the other hand, deliberately attacks anyone who criticises their government. In the US you are perfectly free to say the government are a bunch of fuckwits who should be kicked out of office, if that is your opinion. I'm not necessarily saying that what the US does is legal or morally acceptable, just that it is more morally acceptable than what China does. It's like the difference between a private investigator illegally breaking into someone's house to gather information, and a gangster going in and shooting everyone.
  - rwallace 12y ago
    I'm not even taking a position on whether action A is more morally acceptable than action B. I'm just saying, maybe so, but at the end of the day, not only are they both ethically dodgy but A creates an environment that encourages B, so that in itself is reason to think A should be dialed back a few notches.

rwallace 12y ago

And that is one of the reasons it would be a good idea for the US and other Western countries to dial down some of their more aggressive actions: those actions set precedence that encourage other countries like China to match the escalation.

cpncrunch 12y ago
There does seem to be a difference, though. The US monitors communications, adds backdoors to infrastructure to monitor communications, and injects malware into Iranian nuclear reactors that could be used to make weapons. China, on the other hand, deliberately attacks anyone who criticises their government. In the US you are perfectly free to say the government are a bunch of fuckwits who should be kicked out of office, if that is your opinion. I'm not necessarily saying that what the US does is legal or morally acceptable, just that it is more morally acceptable than what China does. It's like the difference between a private investigator illegally breaking into someone's house to gather information, and a gangster going in and shooting everyone.
- rwallace 12y ago
  I'm not even taking a position on whether action A is more morally acceptable than action B. I'm just saying, maybe so, but at the end of the day, not only are they both ethically dodgy but A creates an environment that encourages B, so that in itself is reason to think A should be dialed back a few notches.